Policy should be shaped by the data -- the indisputable numbers. But, I can't remember the last time when that has been the case. Ideologues, on both sides of the spectrum -- let's be honest though, more so the Republicans -- have found a way to mislead and confuse. Conclusions are always up to debate. The truth is always relative, no matter what the experts say. And even if partisans are confronted with the truth, it doesn't seem to matter.
That is why I was not surprised when I read a study conducted by University of Michigan political scientists. They found that evidence contrary to a held position does nothing to change the opinion of the belief-holder. In fact, the belief-holders grew more adamant in their false beliefs! Brendan Nyhan summarized it as follows: "the general idea is that it's absolutely threatening to admit you're wrong...the phenomenon -- known as 'backfire' -- is a 'natural defense to avoid ... cognitive dissonance.'"
Okay, so we already knew that no one "likes" to be wrong. What's the problem though with admitting that you're wrong, when shown concrete conflicting evidence? I ask, because as you can probably guess, some matters of policy should not be open to much debate.
I preface my comments with the fact that people should not be ridiculed or mocked. Conservatives have rightly condemned the left (some in the cable news business exaggerate) at times for "elitism." Nonetheless, liberals should not concede on the facts.
Republicans still assert a few claims that I find disturbing. "The stimulus did not work." Actually it did, and economists, both conservative and liberal, agree that it prevented another great depression. So can the talking points stop?
Here's another one: "tax cuts on the 'job creators' will boost the economy and the tax cuts will pay for itself." No, not so much in reality. As I pointed out in an earlier blog entry, Kansas attempted to experiment with trickle-down policies and it failed. California raised taxes and the economy grew. When will the voodoo economics stop?
Let's take the controversial, and widely misunderstood, ObamaCare. "No one will sign up," and "premiums will rise exponentially." Both wrong. You may have read -- or probably did not read because of the media coverage -- that over 8 million signed up the first year. The uninsured rate is dropping fast, and even more fast in states that expanded Medicaid. And what about premiums... Yep, you guessed it: California premiums are expected to rise modestly, much lower than the average rate of growth over recent years. Other states are showing the same data.
I won't even opine about climate change. I'll spare you the "activist rhetoric."
If you are one of my conservative friends, odds are that you will likely dismiss these citations and evidence. That's too bad. I'm definitely not saying that my positions are always right. Yet, there needs to be an opposition that can accept these facts. One can still hold conservative beliefs and still accept the evidence.
In this age of polarization, I doubt anything will be agreed upon, It's too damaging politically. Well, maybe one thing can be agreed upon; The scoreboard isn't everything, it's all about how the scoreboard looks.
The
general idea is that it’s absolutely threatening to admit you’re
wrong,” says political scientist Brendan Nyhan, the lead researcher on
the Michigan study. The phenomenon — known as “backfire” — is “a natural
defense mechanism to avoid that cognitive dissonance.” - See more at:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/#sthash.BlQmmnVn.dpuf
The
general idea is that it’s absolutely threatening to admit you’re
wrong,” says political scientist Brendan Nyhan, the lead researcher on
the Michigan study. The phenomenon — known as “backfire” — is “a natural
defense mechanism to avoid that cognitive dissonance.” - See more at:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/#sthash.BlQmmnVn.dpuf
“The
general idea is that it’s absolutely threatening to admit you’re
wrong,” says political scientist Brendan Nyhan, the lead researcher on
the Michigan study. The phenomenon — known as “backfire” — is “a natural
defense mechanism to avoid that cognitive dissonance.” - See more at:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/#sthash.BlQmmnVn.dpuf
“The
general idea is that it’s absolutely threatening to admit you’re
wrong,” says political scientist Brendan Nyhan, the lead researcher on
the Michigan study. The phenomenon — known as “backfire” — is “a natural
defense mechanism to avoid that cognitive dissonance.” - See more at:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/#sthash.BlQmmnVn.dpuf
